'Democracy for the elite': Rees-Mogg faces backlash as government wins bid to end remote voting for MPs

Commons leader says: ‘Voting while enjoying a sunny walk or watching television does democracy an injustice’

MPs from across the political spectrum criticised Rees-Mogg (AFP/Getty)

Jacob Rees-Mogg has vowed to bring forward a motion that will allow MPs who can’t attend parliament physically on “medical grounds” to continue to ask questions remotely – but defended ending virtual voting.

The partial climbdown from the government comes after ministers faced significant criticism from cross-party MPs over the decision to end the so-called “hybrid parliament” which was introduced due to the outbreak of coronavirus.

Those opposed to the proposals said MPs self-isolating or shielding due to Covid-19 and cannot be physically present in the Commons would be unable to participate in parliamentary business and represent constituents.

During the first socially distanced vote on Tuesday, MPs were seen in long queues stretching across the parliamentary estate, with some posting on social media of the “ludicrous scenes” before walking through the chamber individually to vote.

They voted by 261 to 163 in favour of the government’s motion which stated members “may only participate physically within the parliamentary estate” – ending the virtual proceedings that came into force in April.

Earlier, the leader of the Commons Mr Rees-Mogg unveiled the government’s compromise, saying he will bring forward a motion on Wednesday “to allow members who for medical grounds are unable to attend to continue to appear for scrutiny – that is to say questions, urgent questions and statements – remotely”.

But defending the decision to end virtual voting, he said: “Voting while enjoying a sunny walk or watching television does democracy an injustice – the solemn decisions we take together affect the lives of millions of people in this country.”

“We ask members to vote in person for a reason, because it is the heart of what parliament is about,” he added.

His comments provoked an immediate backlash, with senior Labour MP Hilary Benn commenting: “It’s completely unacceptable for the government to continue to deny MPs who are shielding, or living with those who are, the right to vote in the parliament to which they have been elected.”

Shadow Commons leader Valerie Vaz said Mr Rees-Mogg had acted in a “staggeringly arrogant” manner, adding: “What the leader of the House is proposing is discriminatory.”

Rosena Allin-Khan, the Labour MP for Tooting, said: “Normal life is on hold. Many are shielding, some can’t get childcare, others can’t travel. Yet, Rees-Mogg demands MPs return to vote in person.

“Rees-Mogg is preventing MPs with caring commitments, or need to shield, from having their say. It’s democracy for the elite.”

While welcoming the physical return of parliament, the former Tory chancellor Sajid Javid earlier said: “I cannot understand why MPs genuinely affected by Covid-19 – such as those shielding, self-isolating, caring – are unable to vote by proxy. I hope the government thinks again.”

The Twickenham Liberal Democrat MP Munira Wilson added: “Thanks to Jacob Rees-Mogg, I’m heading back into Westminster, putting my husband who’s on immunosuppressants at greater risk, despite virtual [parliament] working well.

“I’ll be joining 1km+ queue of MPs to vote to keep remote participation so everyone can represent their constituents.”

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) also wrote to all MPs on Tuesday warning that proposals to end remote voting will “place at significant disadvantage MPs who are shielding or self-isolating”.

EHRC’s chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath said: “We are concerned by the announcement today from the leader of the House of Commons which implies parliament may proceed without provision for the remote participation of members who are unable to travel to Westminster because of the pandemic.

“This will place at significant disadvantage MPs who are shielding or self-isolating because of age, disability, health conditions or pregnancy, as well as other members who will struggle to attend the chamber in person due to travel restrictions and caring responsibilities.

“It cannot be right for parliament to proceed without provision for remote participation when many elected representatives cannot attend in person.”